Literature DB >> 18725404

Anxiety, fear of cancer, and perceived risk of cancer following lung cancer screening.

Margaret M Byrne1, Joel Weissfeld, Mark S Roberts.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening can result in a high rate of indeterminate findings and has not yet been proven to be efficacious in reducing mortality. To date, the psychological consequences of receiving an indeterminate screening result are not known.
METHODS: Four hundred individuals were recruited into this study. Participants completed 4 surveys: baseline, after lung screening results were known, and at 6 and 12 mo after screening. Demographics, state/trait anxiety, fear of cancer, and perceived risk of lung cancer were measured. Mixed-model regressions were used to determine whether the levels and time trends of outcome variables were different among individuals with different screening outcomes.
RESULTS: An indeterminate screening result increased state anxiety of participants, although anxiety then decreased over time. The objective risk of cancer is lower for individuals with an indeterminate screen than their initial perceived risk, and screening did not change their perceived risk of cancer. Those with a suspicious screening result had increased perceived risk of cancer and fear of cancer after screening, and these effects also diminished over time. Individuals with a negative screen had a temporary reduction in perceived risk of cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: Individuals who are screened for lung cancer and receive an indeterminate or suspicious screening result have some negative psychological effects from being screened. The results suggest that individuals who are considering screening should be fully informed of the risk of negative psychosocial consequences and that individuals who have been screened should receive clear and detailed information on interpreting screening results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18725404     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X08322013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  47 in total

1.  A qualitative study of lung cancer risk perceptions and smoking beliefs among national lung screening trial participants.

Authors:  Elyse R Park; Joanna M Streck; Ilana F Gareen; Jamie S Ostroff; Kelly A Hyland; Nancy A Rigotti; Hannah Pajolek; Mark Nichter
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2013-09-02       Impact factor: 4.244

Review 2.  Principles of Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Paul F Pinsky
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2015-06-20       Impact factor: 2.741

Review 3.  Screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography: a review of current status.

Authors:  Henry M Marshall; Rayleen V Bowman; Ian A Yang; Kwun M Fong; Christine D Berg
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  'The thing is not knowing': patients' perspectives on surveillance of an indeterminate pulmonary nodule.

Authors:  Renda Soylemez Wiener; Michael K Gould; Steven Woloshin; Lisa M Schwartz; Jack A Clark
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-12-16       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  What do you mean, a spot?: A qualitative analysis of patients' reactions to discussions with their physicians about pulmonary nodules.

Authors:  Renda Soylemez Wiener; Michael K Gould; Steven Woloshin; Lisa M Schwartz; Jack A Clark
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 9.410

6.  Healthcare use after screening for lung cancer.

Authors:  Margaret M Byrne; Tulay Koru-Sengul; Wei Zhao; Joel L Weissfeld; Mark S Roberts
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-10-15       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Perceptions of lung cancer risk and beliefs in screening accuracy of spiral computed tomography among high-risk lung cancer family members.

Authors:  Pamela S Sinicrope; Kari G Rabe; Tabetha A Brockman; Christi A Patten; Wesley O Petersen; Joshua Slusser; Ping Yang; Stephen J Swensen; Eric S Edell; Mariza de Andrade; Gloria M Petersen
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.173

8.  Assessing the benefits and harms of low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer.

Authors:  Paul F Pinsky
Journal:  Lung Cancer Manag       Date:  2014

9.  CT scan screening is associated with increased distress among subjects of the APExS.

Authors:  Christophe Paris; Marion Maurel; Amandine Luc; Audrey Stoufflet; Jean-Claude Pairon; Marc Letourneux
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-10-26       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Short-term health-related quality of life consequences in a lung cancer CT screening trial (NELSON).

Authors:  K A M van den Bergh; M L Essink-Bot; G J J M Borsboom; E Th Scholten; M Prokop; H J de Koning; R J van Klaveren
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-11-24       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.